A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital ZLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 16th 07, 02:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Wolfgang Weisselberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,285
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

Helmsman3 wrote:

I see no reason to waste my time answering any of your other questions when the
last few were such an obvious attempt at stupidity.


You run out of answers much faster than I though.


Try trolling someone else into being your entertainment.


Thanks for the hint, you really are a master of that art.


I'm smarter than you.


Smarting.
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf

-Wolfgang
  #12  
Old November 16th 07, 03:09 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Neil Harrington[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 699
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?


"Helmsman3" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that
doesn't
allow in any dust. Takes images in absolute silence. The lens range is a
full
180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long zoom, all with either an
aperture or
sensor ISO high enough to capture even the most difficult of hand-held
situations in any settings. The body is of a titanium shell for extreme
durability. Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero
environments.
Let
us also presume that the electronic viewfinder (LCD and EVF) is high
resolution
enough that its display, feedback, and articulation abilities far exceed
anything that has been implemented so far, optically or otherwise. Lets
also
presume that these P&S camera designers also had the foresight to
include the
options of shooting in the IR and UV portions of the spectrum too. This
of
course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical viewfinder in
the
world
can accomplish this. Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high
quality
video and CD quality stereo sound recording too so you don't even need
your
camcorder as an accessory anymore. Why not.


Surprisingly I've already found all of these conditions met in only 2
P&S
cameras (minus the UV capability and a slightly higher resolution EVF)
with
only
2 inexpensive, small, and light-weight adapter lenses.


and which two p&s cameras might those be?


One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of
any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure
it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.

Get to work!

You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair
photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.


In a lot fewer words than those, you could have just answered the question.


  #13  
Old November 16th 07, 04:04 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Neil Harrington[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 699
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?


"Helmsman3" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:32:29 +0100, "Bill Again" wrote:



You might be right. But just as the cheap watch from Woolworths tells me
in
general the same time as any other watch, for some daft reason I prefer my
Rolex. And while my neighbours Nissan takes him adequately from A to B, I
prefer, silly as it may sound, driving there in the Mercedes. Daft I know,
but personal preferences play heavily in these choices. I am sure,
however,
that you enjoy your P&S. Keep up the good work, the industry needs you.

:-)


You have that quite backwards, don't you. The industry needs people like
you
paying $12,000 on DSLR bodies that only cost $200 to make, and paying
$2000 or
more per lens when it only costs them $50 each to make. Much more than
they need
someone like me who only puts his money where it really matters. As they
say, a
fool and his money are soon parted. I do the research first to know when
I'm
getting ripped off by some company. I also test things myself instead of
depending on some self-appointed internet pros who have never been nearer
to any
camera than a photograph of one online. Every camera company CEO must
raise a
glass and a hearty round of laughter in your honor from the deck of their
next
new yacht that you stupidly paid for without even realizing it.

By the way, you're using a really poor if not just totally illogical
analogy.
The images from my P&S cameras are every bit as good as any of those from
any
DSLR. If they were not I wouldn't have sold my DSLRs and lenses.


From your posts it seems extremely unlikely you've ever even used a DSLR,
let alone owned one.

I must admit you had me going, though. I actually thought you were
serious -- up to the point where you said "a $100 lens can run rings around
any $20,000 lens on the market" and claimed to make tack-sharp 1-second
exposures hand held. I guess I'm a little slow this morning.

Neil


  #14  
Old November 16th 07, 04:38 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Serge Desplanques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On 2007-11-15 20:34:46 -0700, Wolfgang Weisselberg
said:
What about lens qualities, like flatness of field, vignetting,
resolution, CA, and all the myriad things that can make an image
less than appealing? Especially in soupzooms like the one you
describe such things are prevalent --- even in really goood ones
(for the class).

think of the optics in the kit as a toolbox...one kind of craftsman has
a collection of well-used implements, many of which have value only to
him, while another takes extreme pride in an elegant satin-lined fitted
case containing top-of-the line items which look brand new, a third
exhibits an attitude which looks a lot like reverse snobbery: tools
filthy, dinged, tape & stickers plastered on the sides, etc....I'm not
arguing with Wolfgang here, BTW, but offering my own celebration of the
interchangeable lens mount...I really enjoy experimenting with
different lenses...the other type--the one who wants a do-everything
fixed-lens gadget, that looks like a futuristic weapon from a PS3
game--has a totally different approach, but why must it always be "us
against them"?

The DSLR will have about the same fondness in 15 years as we do when looking
back on the flash-cube Instamatic from the late 60's with all its inherent
faults, drawbacks, and limitations. The phrase "I can't believe we put up with
those DSLRs back then," will be commonly heard.


Sure, and you will be crowned "King of the World".

when the D3s and the lenses coming out contemporaneously are being cast
off, I'll be glad to tinker with them
--
"Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know."

  #15  
Old November 16th 07, 09:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:09:18 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote in
:

"Helmsman3" wrote in message
.. .


[HUGE SNIP]


In a lot fewer words than those, you could have just answered the question.


And spared us all the insults. Amen!

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #16  
Old November 16th 07, 10:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Charles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 695
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?


"Pete D" wrote in message
...


I really loved the "thousands of photos published",
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight,


That is a huge stretch. Maybe he will tell us how they were "published."
(Perhaps right after he identifies the magical P&S cameras?) He rates a
plonk.


  #17  
Old November 16th 07, 11:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
RealityBytes[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:04:26 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"Helmsman3" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:32:29 +0100, "Bill Again" wrote:



You might be right. But just as the cheap watch from Woolworths tells me
in
general the same time as any other watch, for some daft reason I prefer my
Rolex. And while my neighbours Nissan takes him adequately from A to B, I
prefer, silly as it may sound, driving there in the Mercedes. Daft I know,
but personal preferences play heavily in these choices. I am sure,
however,
that you enjoy your P&S. Keep up the good work, the industry needs you.

:-)


You have that quite backwards, don't you. The industry needs people like
you
paying $12,000 on DSLR bodies that only cost $200 to make, and paying
$2000 or
more per lens when it only costs them $50 each to make. Much more than
they need
someone like me who only puts his money where it really matters. As they
say, a
fool and his money are soon parted. I do the research first to know when
I'm
getting ripped off by some company. I also test things myself instead of
depending on some self-appointed internet pros who have never been nearer
to any
camera than a photograph of one online. Every camera company CEO must
raise a
glass and a hearty round of laughter in your honor from the deck of their
next
new yacht that you stupidly paid for without even realizing it.

By the way, you're using a really poor if not just totally illogical
analogy.
The images from my P&S cameras are every bit as good as any of those from
any
DSLR. If they were not I wouldn't have sold my DSLRs and lenses.


From your posts it seems extremely unlikely you've ever even used a DSLR,
let alone owned one.

I must admit you had me going, though. I actually thought you were
serious -- up to the point where you said "a $100 lens can run rings around
any $20,000 lens on the market" and claimed to make tack-sharp 1-second
exposures hand held. I guess I'm a little slow this morning.

Neil


No, you're just slow all around. Those shutter speeds hand-held are quite doable
with today's IS cameras. I too tested this. With the right stance it's quite
easy. All that you've managed to reveal is that your either very bad at
photography or have never used any of the better P&S IS systems out there. Maybe
you just need to give up that coffee in the morning when you feel that you are
slow. It appears that's not helping, only hurting.

While I might question the $100 lens situation, it is quite possible that the OP
found a combination that works better with his P&S's camera lens than any other
lens on the market. Just by chance it might be optically better than any optical
designer could have come up with on the bench.

I found a similar situation with one of my tele-converters. If I place a
particular flint-glass lens of very low diopter (a surplus acquisition) between
the camera and tele-converter, I get less CA than the tele-converter can do on
its own. It's of such low-diopter that it only changes the focal range a bit,
but well within bounds of the camera's ability to still use it. I have since
made a holder for it so I can mount it permanently behind my tele-converter,
increasing its performance to a ZERO-CA condition. By chance alone, along with
some educated guesswork from studying the CA patterns and knowing about the
properties of various glasses, I managed to accomplish what the lens designers
could not. Mind you, this is only needed when using it with one of my P&S
cameras, something between tele-converter and that particular camera lens don't
like each other. The extra element makes them talk to each other quite nicely.

It's not impossible to find the right combinations of accessory glass + camera
lenses that can do this. But it does require experience, time, research, and
sometimes even luck at getting the right combinations. I don't deny the OP his
choice to not share that with you. I'm not going to tell you what combo of
lenses I use either. Why would I want you to have a better camera than I do?

I also lucked out with the sensor on one of my P&S cameras, in that it has near
zero noise at ISO 400, no hot pixels, and only 3 slightly warm ones when shutter
speeds longer than 10 seconds are used. Just a luck of the draw on sensor
batches that day I guess. If only they could study why that happened and
replicate it for everyone.

There are no absolutes. Just lack of experience in some people. Judging by the
misinformed opinions expressed in these newsgroups I'd say the depth of their
experience with photography begins and ends with their keyboards.



  #18  
Old November 16th 07, 11:55 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Neil Harrington[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 699
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?


"RealityBytes" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:04:26 -0500, "Neil Harrington"

wrote:


"Helmsman3" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:32:29 +0100, "Bill Again" wrote:



You might be right. But just as the cheap watch from Woolworths tells me
in
general the same time as any other watch, for some daft reason I prefer
my
Rolex. And while my neighbours Nissan takes him adequately from A to B,
I
prefer, silly as it may sound, driving there in the Mercedes. Daft I
know,
but personal preferences play heavily in these choices. I am sure,
however,
that you enjoy your P&S. Keep up the good work, the industry needs you.

:-)


You have that quite backwards, don't you. The industry needs people like
you
paying $12,000 on DSLR bodies that only cost $200 to make, and paying
$2000 or
more per lens when it only costs them $50 each to make. Much more than
they need
someone like me who only puts his money where it really matters. As they
say, a
fool and his money are soon parted. I do the research first to know when
I'm
getting ripped off by some company. I also test things myself instead of
depending on some self-appointed internet pros who have never been
nearer
to any
camera than a photograph of one online. Every camera company CEO must
raise a
glass and a hearty round of laughter in your honor from the deck of
their
next
new yacht that you stupidly paid for without even realizing it.

By the way, you're using a really poor if not just totally illogical
analogy.
The images from my P&S cameras are every bit as good as any of those
from
any
DSLR. If they were not I wouldn't have sold my DSLRs and lenses.


From your posts it seems extremely unlikely you've ever even used a DSLR,
let alone owned one.

I must admit you had me going, though. I actually thought you were
serious -- up to the point where you said "a $100 lens can run rings
around
any $20,000 lens on the market" and claimed to make tack-sharp 1-second
exposures hand held. I guess I'm a little slow this morning.

Neil


No, you're just slow all around. Those shutter speeds hand-held are quite
doable
with today's IS cameras. I too tested this.

[continuing bull**** deleted]

Whaddaya mean, "I too"?

From your message header, you appear to be the same jerk.

Plonk.


  #19  
Old November 17th 07, 02:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
Wilba[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 360
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

Smarting.
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf


Brilliant! Validates what I tend to call "delusions of competence".


  #20  
Old November 17th 07, 03:46 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
mike johannsen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:25:44 -0800 (PST), acl
wrote:

On Nov 16, 4:17 pm, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote:


http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf



After reading that, I have to say that it is in fact a very
interesting paper. Thank you! I wonder how it was received in the
relevant research community.


Once a troll always a troll. Since that has nothing to do with photography his
trollness has been completely revealed. You all fell for it.

Not too bright, are you. Some people are smart enough to see them for what they
truly are. There's no artificial self-inflation about it. Just fact.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? Bill Tuthill Digital Photography 1067 December 29th 07 03:46 AM
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? Helmsman3 35mm Photo Equipment 790 December 26th 07 06:40 PM
DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital? Helmsman3 Digital ZLR Cameras 640 December 26th 07 06:40 PM
[IMG] "REPLAY" - Minolta 100mm f/2 with Sony Alpha DSLR Jens Mander Digital Photography 0 August 13th 06 11:06 PM
EOS Film user needs help for first DSLR Ged Digital Photography 13 August 9th 04 10:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.